Fact Checkers Combat Disinformation Amid Declining Social Media Support

The truth-telling struggle is intensifying for fact-checkers as major platforms withdraw support and access to reliable information becomes increasingly difficult, experts warned during a panel at the 26th International Symposium on Online Journalism (ISOJ) in late March.

Moderated by University of Wisconsin-Madison journalism professor Lucas Graves, the panel addressed the complex landscape of platform-enabled misinformation at a time when public trust in news is eroding. According to a 2024 Reuters Institute report cited by Graves, only 40% of respondents trust “most news most of the time,” with an equal percentage admitting they actively avoid news altogether.

Despite this concerning trend, Graves highlighted a silver lining: “The same research shows that people have a lot of difficulty deciding what’s real and what’s fake on the Internet, and they want help doing that. They value news organizations that are transparent, have high standards, and are fair.”

The panelists voiced particular alarm over Meta’s January decision to eliminate its third-party fact-checking program, which had paid organizations to review content across its platforms. Clara Jiménez Cruz, chair of the European Fact-checking Standards Network and co-founder of Maldita.es, emphasized that Meta’s program “added context and did not censor anyone’s content,” allowing users to receive important contextual information from fact-checkers.

Glenn Kessler, who leads The Washington Post’s Fact Checker column, acknowledged Meta’s significant role in establishing fact-checking organizations globally but expressed concern about the industry’s overreliance on a single corporate sponsor. “It certainly spread fact-checking around the globe. But it also shows how you can be subject to the whims of a billionaire,” Kessler noted.

Laura Zommer, chief executive and co-founder of Factchecqueado, offered a more pointed critique, accusing Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg of dishonesty. “The reason he’s lying is because he can’t say to the public or the users on the platform that he decided to prioritize his business to align with Donald Trump’s government,” Zommer said.

The panelists agreed that social media platforms are increasingly functioning as political actors rather than neutral information channels. Kessler described X (formerly Twitter) as “a 24/7 propaganda channel for the Trump Administration and whatever Elon Musk deems important,” while noting the growing difficulty for users to filter out false information due to algorithmic design.

Adapting to this challenging environment, fact-checking organizations are pursuing innovative approaches. Zommer revealed that Factchecqueado has found success by paying influencers to help spread fact-checking content, explaining that they “follow the logic of the algorithm” and can reach audiences that traditional media outlets cannot.

Access to reliable government data – historically a cornerstone of fact-checking – is also becoming increasingly problematic. Kessler described a “systematic assault on the basic data that helps inform reporting, helps inform fact-checking” in the United States, with public information disappearing from federal websites.

Zommer noted this pattern is familiar in Latin America, where “it was common for outgoing administrations to scrape government data before an opposition party arrives.” She added, “In our countries, they always delete what they don’t like.”

The panelists emphasized that the stakes couldn’t be higher. “We’re fighting a narrative that’s here to undermine democracy and change the world as we know it,” Cruz warned. “We might be too late, but either we start calling things by their name, or then we will be very late.”

Looking ahead, the fact-checkers stressed the need for strategic adaptation. Kessler advocated for meeting audiences “in the space where they’re seeking information” through creative, engaging formats. Zommer called for greater focus on distribution strategies to reach beyond those already concerned about democratic institutions.

“What we need to be doing is more collaboration, more deep discussion but also actionable things to start resistance,” Zommer concluded, underlining the urgency of the moment and the critical role fact-checkers play in preserving democratic discourse in an increasingly hostile information environment.